The Action Sheet was noted and an updated copy
could be viewed at the following link under ‘Committee Action
Sheet’.

18/30/WAC

Open Forum

Minutes:

Members of the public asked a
number of questions, as set out below.

1.Member of the
Public (MOP)

What should members of
the public do if they are concerned about rough sleeping or drug
taking?

Councillor Bick
suggested that the public should call the police if there was an on-going crime or if the
concern was the wellbeing of the individual, there were contact
points that he would share outside the meeting.

2.Richard
Taylor

Stated that his
question, asked at the the July meeting
to be forwarded to the CSP and answered in the action sheet, was an
inaccurate reflection of what he said. He stated that the reply did
not instill confidence that violent offenders were sufficiently
monitored when serving community sentences.

Councillor Nethsingha
said this was a matter outside the remit of this Committee and that
offering personal perspectives on the matter would not be
helpful.

18/31/WAC

Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces:

Councillor Thornburrow will be in
attendance

Minutes:

The Executive Councillor for Streets and Open
Spaces, Councillor Thornburrow, gave an overview of what had been
achieved in the West Central Area using EIP funding in recent
years.

The following questions were asked:

1.Councillor Gehring

Welcomed the
assurance that the Lammas Land Fountain project would be delivered.
It was hoped that this would reduce plastic waste.

The intention was to install
taps on public buildings where ever possible in the future.

2.Councillor Bick

There are
outstanding EIP projects that have been in the pipeline for three
years. Is there sufficient officer resource to deliver the work
required?

Officers were confident that they
have the resources required to deliver these complicated projects,
some of which require joint working with other bodies.

3.Councillor Hipkin

Pedestrians find themselves forced into the road due to street
furniture, including tables and chairs. Is there a checking process
to ensure that traders are not encroaching on the footpath? What
are the fees for pavement tables and who collects them?

The Executive Councillor
undertook to investigate this further.

Action: Cllr Thornburrow

4.Councillor Gillespie

The winter market and fun
fair on Parker’s Piece has grown beyond what was originally
envisaged. What action is planned for the future?

A new
contract would be negotiated shortly.

5.MOP

Why are the minutes of the
Cam Conservators meeting not available to members of the
public?

Meeting are open to observers but at present minutes were not
routinely published.

6.MOP

Some organisations had been
asked to consultation events regarding the development of the
Market Square.

The
Executive Councillor’s remit for the Market Square only
covered cleaning.

Councillor Nethsingha suggested the officers involved in the
project could be invited to a future West Central Area
Committee.

7.MOP

Initiatives to look at some
areas of the riverbank and city centre fail to consider the area as
a whole. Can a joined up approach be adopted?

Currently a biodiversity strategy exists but is in need of
updating.

8.MOP

Is there a strategic approach
to the delivery of car charging points in the city centre?

Various
options were being considered.

The Executive
Councillor thanked West Central AreaCommittee for the invitation to attend. She
stated that she is keen to develop her understanding of Ward level
issues. Ward walkabouts were planned for the New Year and
suggestions of places to visit would be welcomed.

The Committee received a report from
SergeantMišíkregarding policing and safer neighbourhoods trends.

The report outlined actions taken since the last
reporting period. The current emerging issues/neighbourhood trends
for each ward were also highlighted (see report for full details).
Previous priorities and engagement activity noted in the report
were:

i.Drug dealing, associated begging and anti-social
behaviour.

ii.Dangerous driving by coaches on Queen’s Road
at key times on Saturdays

Sarah Steggles, Anti-Social Behaviour
Officer, gave an update on initiatives to address rough sleeping
and anti-social behaviour. Her team had a range of options open to
them. Working with other agencies, individuals would be offered
support to move them of the streets but some were reluctant to
engage in this process. Where problematic behaviour impacted on
other people further action, including Police action, could be
considered.

The
following questions were asked:

1.MOP

Fitzroy
Street and Grafton Centre area is suffering due to anti-social
behaviour and criminal activities.

The Police need as much
evidence, that can be gathered safely, to investigate. Car
registrations, descriptions (including descriptions of dogs) were
all helpful to build up a picture of activities.

2.MOP

When
reporting an incident of threatening behaviour via 999 callers were
told to use the 101 number.

If the situation was no longer
ongoing (the perpetrator had moved on)
then 999 operatives would make a judgement call about referring
callers to the 101 number. However, SergeantMišík undertook to feed
back the MOP dissatisfaction with the response.

3.MOP

Residents in
Grafton Area had reported a number of incidents via the 101 number.
However, when they use an FOI to view recorded incidents, many of
their reports were missing.

The local team were well aware
of the issues in the area. Complex issues such as these would be
investigated and cross team action would follow.

4.MOP

Similar
problems were reported last year. A single point of contact would
be helpful.

Sarah Steggles suggested that
incidents could also be reported to the City Council ASB team.

5.MOP

Reported
incidents of drug dealing were not taken seriously and no action
followed?

SergeantMišík
stated that his team reviewed reports relating to their own areas
and were aware of on-going issues. The FOI might not have produced
the full results due to IT issues and complication of the search
methods. There were complex issues in the area that are being
addressed in a cross team approach.

6.Councillor Bick

Residents
were concerned that ASB is linked to the wider criminal offences
that were taking place in the area. If the criminal behaviour was
addressed the ASB would also be resolved. People lack faith in the
reporting systems. Can an audit of reported incidents over a set
period be carried out?

SergeantMišík stated that a
similar approach had been used elsewhere. He undertook to meet
local residents outside the meeting to discuss this further.

7.Councillor Nethsingha

Suggested that the Council could do more to discourage people
giving to beggars and to promote more appropriate routes for
donations.

Sarah Steggles outlined the
Street Aid gifting process. She suggested that members of the
public did not welcome authorities, such as councils, telling them
not to give directly to people who appeared to be homeless.

Councillor Nethsingha suggested that the Police and Crime
Commissioner could be invited to West Central to discuss the issues
around drugs and rough sleeping.

8.Councillor Scutt

Are there
any details available on the use of young people (under 16’s)
as couriers by drug dealers? North Area Committee had agreed a
priority to protect young people who had been excluded from school
being abused.

Information around this matter
was unclear. People move around and accurate figures were not
available.

9.Councillor Scutt

A long term
solution was needed regarding coach parking on Queen’s
Road.

Members noted that they were no longer asked to vote on priorities
and the following areas of concern were discussed.

i.
Drug related behaviour in the Grafton Centre area as already
discussed.

ii.
Poor behaviour of cyclists and moped riders in the City Centre.
This included speeding, lack of lights and cycling on
pavements.

The Cambourne to Cambridge
Public Transport route is a major project for the Greater Cambridge
Partnership and the region, creating a vital link to connect
growing communities to jobs, services and
other opportunities. Oral update.

The strategic case for the
transport route was outlined with the three main drivers being,
Economic Growth, Congestion and New Growth.

The following questions were
asked:

1.MOP

What happens to the buses once they reach Grange Road?

It was
anticipated that the vehicles would follow demand lead routes,
possibly similar to existing services.

2.Councillor Hipkin

What had convinced Mayor Palmer of the compatibility
of the Greenways and Rapid Passenger Transit systems?

Councillor Nethsingha stated that
Mayor Palmer had apologised for his original comments and had
revised his views in light of recent consultant reports.

3.Councillor Hipkin

Concerns had been voiced regarding the rail link to Bedford and
what route that would be taking. Are details available?

No information was currently
available as a separate business case needed to be completed.

4.Councillor Hipkin

The
plans (for the Cambridge Autonomous Metro) are very ambitions. What
would it cost?

The project is currently
being developed by the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined
Authority and a Strategic Outline Business Case is to be prepared.
At present the cost and finances are not confirmed.

5.Councillor Hipkin

How
compatible would the system be and what sort of vehicles would be
used?

The system would be called a
Rapid Transport System and would be likely to change over time.
Currently, it was anticipated that the vehicles would have rubber
wheels and would be electric.

6.Councillor Gehring

Consultation results have been ignored and the current proposal is
the one that no-one wanted. Additional buses entering an already
busy area would add to existing problems. Gantry points are also
unpopular.

To
allow a tidal flow of vehicles, gantry points would be necessary.
The consultations concentrated on the most deliverable options.
Initially, it was anticipated that there would be around 9 per
hour. Once they reach the end of their dedicated track, they would
take different routes.

7.If Mayor Palmer is insistent on a tunnel option, why
damage West Fields to deliver a track?

Attendees at Local Liaison Forums (LLFs) had spent years giving
feedback that had been ignored in the report. Current proposal
would present a risk to the historic core.

The importance of West
Fields had been recognised. However, there was a need to move
forward with the project. Reports on the consultation results were
published before a short pause in the project. LLF feedback had
been noted. Nothing was yet determined. The project team would
engage with the Save West Fields group.

8.MOP

Where would the bus
interchange be?

There
are no plans for a bus interchange.

The Committee thanked Adrian
Shepherd and Jo Baker and hoped they would return at a later date
when there were more details on the project.

18/34/WAC

Rough Sleeping Report: Oral Update

Councillor Bick and
Councillor Harrison.

Minutes:

Councillor Bick stated that there was
currently nothing to add to the report previously considered by
Housing Scrutiny Committee and this Committee. An update might be
brought back at a later date.